pa2a.org


Share Thread:  
Supreme Court asked to decide on three gun cases
#1
Quote:The Supreme Court on Friday will consider whether to wade into a growing legal brawl over the scope of the Second Amendment and how far the Constitution goes in protecting Americans’ self-defense rights outside of their homes, with the justices deciding whether to take up three pending gun cases.

Six years ago, in the landmark Heller case, the court established that the Constitution guarantees a personal right to bear arms, but states — and lower federal courts — have made different judgments about what that means.


Now, in the key case, the National Rifle Association has asked the justices to take up a Texas challenge that questions whether states can impose restrictions on guns that the NRA says would be “unimaginable” if it were for free speech or privacy rights.

One of the other two cases involves a separate NRA lawsuit against the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, challenging whether federal law can require handgun buyers to be at least 21 rather than 18.

The third case questions a 1968 federal law that prevents anyone without a federal firearms license from receiving or processing handguns bought or brought in from out of state.

it’s more likely that the justices will wait for a case that presents big issues about carrying guns in public — possibly a lawsuit over states that give themselves leeway to judge whether someone needs to carry a concealed weapon.

Those states are known as “may carry” jurisdictions, while other states that presume a person eligible unless they are discounted by dint of criminal record or mental problems are considered “shall carry.”


Edward Leddy, a former director of the Center for the Study of Firearms and Public Policy, said a challenge to a “may carry” law would present stark Second Amendment questions that the court could settle.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014...z2tt0dNOXn
It's the "BILL OF RIGHTS" not the bill of "needs"
Reply
#2
middlefinger;135607 Wrote:
Quote:Those states are known as “may carry” jurisdictions, while other states that presume a person eligible unless they are discounted by dint of criminal record or mental problems are considered “shall carry.”[/b]

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014...z2tt0dNOXn

"Shall carry." LOL
gascolator, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Nov 2012.
Reply
#3
Quote:...justices, who will meet in their regular private conference Friday to decide what cases to hear, could decline to take up any of the three.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014...z2tuPx8rSG

Isn't that convenient.
Reply
#4
Makes sense. I would think that in lieu of the recent 9th Circuit ruling http://www.pa2a.org/thread-ninth-circuit...of-handgun that it would move to the head of the line to settle the riff between the lower appelate courts. In the 9th's ruling, they even mention "Woollard vs. Brown" which was shot down by the 4th circuit, thus upholding Maryland's "Shall Issue". This puts the 4th and the 9th in DIRECT conflict.
SAF Life Member
DeadEye, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Jun 2013.
Reply
#5
crosshair 
I think they will. If they don't California falls and then.. maryland is in conflict. The 5 or more that would vote one way or the other will want it so. I have little doubt.
Reply
#6
ExcelToExcel;135862 Wrote:I think they will. If they don't California falls and then.. maryland is in conflict. The 5 or more that would vote one way or the other will want it so. I have little doubt.

Guess again... Dodgy

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/2...2820140224

Quote:(Reuters) - The Supreme Court on Monday declined to wade into the politically volatile issue of gun control by leaving intact three court rulings rejecting challenges to federal and state laws.

The court's decision not to hear the cases represented a loss for gun rights advocates, including the National Rifle Association, which was behind two of the challenges.

More at link, above.

There is still Drake v NJ.
.
“Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.”

William Pitt
Reply
#7
http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/...z2uG2P5JI6

Quote:WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has turned down a pair of 2nd Amendment appeals lodged by the National Rifle Assn., keeping in place laws that restrict those under 21 years old from buying or carrying a handgun.
Without comment, the justices dismissed claims by NRA attorneys who argued limits on those who are 18 to 20 infringe the “fundamental right” to have firearms for self-defense.


http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/...z2uG2r7k8i
NRA (Life), GOA, FOAC (Life), NAGR, AMGOA

RocketFoot's Minion since 09-07-2012
Reply
#8
bigdawgbeav;135896 Wrote:http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/...z2uG2P5JI6

Quote:WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has turned down a pair of 2nd Amendment appeals lodged by the National Rifle Assn., keeping in place laws that restrict those under 21 years old from buying or carrying a handgun.
Without comment, the justices dismissed claims by NRA attorneys who argued limits on those who are 18 to 20 infringe the “fundamental right” to have firearms for self-defense.


http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/...z2uG2r7k8i

Quote:...This law was upheld by a federal judge in Texas and by the 5th Circuit Court in New Orleans. Those judges said the age limits on handgun sales were justified because of the concern over violent crime...

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Ben Franklin

Dodgy
[Image: pa_zps59e4c512.png?t=1379682235]
Reply
#9
Curmudgeon;135895 Wrote:
ExcelToExcel;135862 Wrote:I think they will. If they don't California falls and then.. maryland is in conflict. The 5 or more that would vote one way or the other will want it so. I have little doubt.

Guess again... Dodgy

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/2...2820140224

Quote:(Reuters) - The Supreme Court on Monday declined to wade into the politically volatile issue of gun control by leaving intact three court rulings rejecting challenges to federal and state laws.

The court's decision not to hear the cases represented a loss for gun rights advocates, including the National Rifle Association, which was behind two of the challenges.

More at link, above.

There is still Drake v NJ.
.

These three cases (I think, IANAL) are a bit different than the 9th Circuit fight. I'm hoping that it is the one that they will weigh in on. For instance, the 9th circuirt ruling addresses: carry outside the home, "May issue", and it flies in direct conflict with the 4th Circuit. I may have missed something, but I don't see them sidestepping the 9th (yet). If they do sidestep it, I don't think they are going to weigh in at all, given the fact that I believe it was Sepreme Court Justce Antonin Scalia, who left the door open to carry outside the home, in his certorairi opinion on Heller.
SAF Life Member
DeadEye, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Jun 2013.
Reply






Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  ‘Military-Style’ Firearms Aren’t Protected By Second Amendment, Court Rules sgtsandman 2 300 02-24-2017, 08:20 PM
Last Post: sgtsandman
  BANS ON BLACK RIFLES: WILL SUPREME COURT FINALLY DECIDE CONSTITUTIONALITY? das 4 863 11-03-2015, 08:41 PM
Last Post: das
  Court decision paves the way for Australian-style gun ban das 5 1,146 10-26-2015, 05:19 PM
Last Post: Uinta Firearms
  Assault Weapons Ban Before U.S. Supreme Court das 4 1,064 10-13-2015, 09:55 PM
Last Post: Uinta Firearms
  Supreme Court Deals Blow to Gun Rights While Justice Thomas Delivers a Silver Lining das 20 1,918 06-17-2015, 11:41 PM
Last Post: Uinta Firearms



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Software by MyBB, © 2002-2015 MyBB Group.
Template by Modogodo Design.